611–620 of 799 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what's your proposed solution? Not have a military and just roll over when someone decides to attack you?
My proposed solution is understanding what this scene means: In front of a blood-stained chessboard littered with mutilated chess pieces finely dine two royal couples - black and white - cheering their endgame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what's your proposed solution? Not have a military and just roll over when someone decides to attack you?
My proposed solution is understanding what this scene means: In front of a blood-stained chessboard littered with mutilated chess pieces finely dine two royal couples - black and white - cheering their endgame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this relate to my comment?
It isn’t “every law.” It’s not written to be directly operationalised. You’re comparing a declaration of values to operational law; they’re words in different ways and contexts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't, only German citizens
does citizen and German not mean the same thing? Are EU citizens living permanently in germany even considered to have a duty to either militarily or in civil service serve in war times?
https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h...
So that article can in theory be used to conscript any man, citizen or not, living in Germany or not.
The Wehrpflichtgesetz, which is a simple law and requires just the 50% Bundestag majority to have it changed, refines this very wide constitutional power in article 1, to require men who hold German citizenship above 18.
https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.ht...
Article 3 refines it even further to folks below 45 or 60, depending on the severity of the situation.
But yes, in theory it can be changed to include any non-German citizen man, people aged 80, living inside of Germany since a while or never having been to Germany ever, or just random men who happen to change flights at FRA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also Curds and Israelis prove that women can very well be full on soldiers.
Kurds* yes and Sweden as well. I agree, it's not like people are running around swinging broadswords, maces and war axes anymore. Anyone without a disability can run and pull a trigger or do all those technical jobs.
This is very much untrue in terms of being a soldier in a high-functioning military.
Technically, you’re not wrong (at least for lighter weapons). That said, there are many more physically demanding things that are involved in doing infantry things (which is what you’re describing) other than running and pulling a trigger (and ideally hitting the target).
> or do all those technical jobs.
Depends on the job, but much more likely.
The vast majority of the jobs in the military are not infantry or infantry-type jobs, so I can see a lot more scope for drafted women who aren’t cut out for infantry doing these things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shockingly sexist policy. And as per usual because its harmful to men no one cares.
The constitution made it impossible to make a less sexist law, because it says that women cannot be forced to military service. It is an old document, and it is based on old role models. Modernizing the constitution would require 2/3 majority, and the government was already struggling with making a law at all. This is an explanation, not a justification.
for the risk of getting downvoted: why only locals, but no migrants?
Even if they are included, they wouldn't join up.
More British Muslims joined ISIS than the British military. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/magazine/her-majestys-jih...>
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kurds* yes and Sweden as well. I agree, it's not like people are running around swinging broadswords, maces and war axes anymore. Anyone without a disability can run and pull a trigger or do all those technical jobs.
> Anyone without a disability can run and pull a trigger This is very much untrue in terms of being a soldier in a high-functioning military. Technically, you’re not wrong (at least for lighter weapons). That said, there are many more physically demanding things that are involved in doing infantry things (which is what you’re describing) other than running and pulling a trigger (and ideally hitting the target). > or…
Exactly.
Why does it exclude women? War is not just physical strength, but also logistics, operating vehicles, operating drones, nursing, and so on. All tasks that women are well capable of.